$MAGIC is back at the top of the gainers list, but this time I’m choosing to wait and see, focusing more on how much it has already given back. A 24-hour gain does not mean it has also been strengthening over the past hour. In the two most recently completed hours, the price fell consecutively and open interest declined noticeably. The high-level build-up in positions discussed in the previous post has already changed.
At 17:02 on October 10, data was complete for all 523 Binance USDT perpetual contracts. MAGIC led the market with a 24-hour gain of 45.07%, quoted at 0.108080. In my manual follow-up at 15:24, the latest completed hour, 14:00–15:00, was still up 1.29%, and OI continued to rise. The discussion then was about weakening buying support at elevated levels and whether lower levels could hold. This update adds the actual results from the subsequent completed hours, so the earlier description of price holding at elevated levels no longer applies.
From 15:00 to 16:00, the perpetual contract fell from 0.159360 to 0.112220, a decline of 29.58%. It hit a low of 0.097270, with trading volume of 194.84 million USDT, about 4.46 times that of the previous hour. Heavy trading accompanied a rapid price drop, indicating that the support seen earlier did not hold. Trading volume includes repeated turnover, so it cannot be directly equated with an equal amount of capital outflow; nor can a candlestick alone prove that large holders were dumping.
Over the same hour, spot fell from 0.159500 to 0.113700, a decline of 28.71%, with trading volume of 15.6531 million USDT. The simultaneous decline in both markets makes it harder to explain this as an isolated wick in the perpetual market. However, their closing prices still differed, and their trading mechanisms and order books are not the same, so their price paths were not identical.
The 16:00–17:00 period also failed to recover the losses. The perpetual contract fell another 5.68%, closing at 0.105820, with a low of 0.100590 and trading volume of 57.5734 million USDT; spot closed at 0.106700. Volume was lower than during the sharp-drop hour, yet the price continued to close lower. For now, all we can say is that trading intensity has eased; lower volume does not mean selling pressure is over. Whether sustained support emerges will be answered by the next complete stretch of trading.
OI was 211.49 million MAGIC at 15:00, fell to 156.15 million at 16:00, then declined further to 148.11 million at 17:00—a drop of about 29.97% over two hours. I’m using token units here to avoid the effect of falling prices reducing the notional amount. The price decline alongside lower OI supports the view that existing positions were being closed. OI cannot distinguish between voluntary and forced liquidations, nor can it be used to report a liquidation amount.
The funding rate settled at -0.057437% at 16:00, compared with -0.003001% at 12:00. The more negative rate is a signal about perpetual pricing and the cost of holding positions; it does not establish that a short squeeze is underway or that a rebound is inevitable. Over the four hours from 12:00 to 16:00, the price fell 26.37%, meaning the positive 24-hour return already includes a significant move in the opposite direction.
Treasure’s official website describes the use of MAGIC for agent computing power as part of its product mechanics. I found no announcement from that day that could independently explain the sharp drop, nor any actual usage-growth data to establish a causal link. The project narrative and trading results need to be assessed separately.
For now, I’m watching for sustained support near 0.100590, then whether a completed hourly close can confirm a breakout above and recovery of 0.112220. If volume increases on a rebound but the price still fails to recover that level, the case for a recovery remains weak. If 0.100590 is breached again, I’ll reassess the 0.097270 low. Only improvement in the price structure, position changes, and spot-market support together would change my view of this pullback.
At 17:02 on October 10, data was complete for all 523 Binance USDT perpetual contracts. MAGIC led the market with a 24-hour gain of 45.07%, quoted at 0.108080. In my manual follow-up at 15:24, the latest completed hour, 14:00–15:00, was still up 1.29%, and OI continued to rise. The discussion then was about weakening buying support at elevated levels and whether lower levels could hold. This update adds the actual results from the subsequent completed hours, so the earlier description of price holding at elevated levels no longer applies.
From 15:00 to 16:00, the perpetual contract fell from 0.159360 to 0.112220, a decline of 29.58%. It hit a low of 0.097270, with trading volume of 194.84 million USDT, about 4.46 times that of the previous hour. Heavy trading accompanied a rapid price drop, indicating that the support seen earlier did not hold. Trading volume includes repeated turnover, so it cannot be directly equated with an equal amount of capital outflow; nor can a candlestick alone prove that large holders were dumping.
Over the same hour, spot fell from 0.159500 to 0.113700, a decline of 28.71%, with trading volume of 15.6531 million USDT. The simultaneous decline in both markets makes it harder to explain this as an isolated wick in the perpetual market. However, their closing prices still differed, and their trading mechanisms and order books are not the same, so their price paths were not identical.
The 16:00–17:00 period also failed to recover the losses. The perpetual contract fell another 5.68%, closing at 0.105820, with a low of 0.100590 and trading volume of 57.5734 million USDT; spot closed at 0.106700. Volume was lower than during the sharp-drop hour, yet the price continued to close lower. For now, all we can say is that trading intensity has eased; lower volume does not mean selling pressure is over. Whether sustained support emerges will be answered by the next complete stretch of trading.
OI was 211.49 million MAGIC at 15:00, fell to 156.15 million at 16:00, then declined further to 148.11 million at 17:00—a drop of about 29.97% over two hours. I’m using token units here to avoid the effect of falling prices reducing the notional amount. The price decline alongside lower OI supports the view that existing positions were being closed. OI cannot distinguish between voluntary and forced liquidations, nor can it be used to report a liquidation amount.
The funding rate settled at -0.057437% at 16:00, compared with -0.003001% at 12:00. The more negative rate is a signal about perpetual pricing and the cost of holding positions; it does not establish that a short squeeze is underway or that a rebound is inevitable. Over the four hours from 12:00 to 16:00, the price fell 26.37%, meaning the positive 24-hour return already includes a significant move in the opposite direction.
Treasure’s official website describes the use of MAGIC for agent computing power as part of its product mechanics. I found no announcement from that day that could independently explain the sharp drop, nor any actual usage-growth data to establish a causal link. The project narrative and trading results need to be assessed separately.
For now, I’m watching for sustained support near 0.100590, then whether a completed hourly close can confirm a breakout above and recovery of 0.112220. If volume increases on a rebound but the price still fails to recover that level, the case for a recovery remains weak. If 0.100590 is breached again, I’ll reassess the 0.097270 low. Only improvement in the price structure, position changes, and spot-market support together would change my view of this pullback.